Facets of Life in an Ancient Oasis: Contrasting Living Spaces at Tayma (Saudi-Arabia)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies on built environments in the Ancient Near East often focus on residential architecture and rarely emphasize the existence of a variety of constructed living spaces that constitute settlements (e.g. habitation, work, subsistence). The ancient oasis of Tayma, situated in the arid region of NW-Arabia, was structured by a vast system of walls that defined several Compounds with distinct characteristics. Their variety is exemplified by Compound E, in which a residential quarter (Area E-South/F) with a continuous archaeological sequence dating at least from the mid-1st mill. BCE to Late Antiquity was excavated, and Compound A, once confining a large intramural agricultural area (Area H) that featured a sophisticated canal system which was in use at least from the 11th–6th cent. BCE. In the present case study, drawn from results of recent fieldwork at the site by a joint Saudi-German project, these contrasting living spaces are analysed. Both represent different facets of everyday life such as agricultural production, food processing, storage and socioeconomic organisation of households. These aspects provide insights into the complex interplay of different living spaces within the ancient oasis of Tayma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".